Flightpath,
You had added a message whilst I composed my last, so sorry for another response!
Not sure either where you are located, or indeed what the motivation is behind your query of UK wake vortex seperation standards?
A little history however - the UK has it's own wake vortex categories above and beyond ICAO standards. The UK, splits ICAO's Medium into Upper and Lower Medium. Also, certain UK airports such as LL can use 'reduced wake vortex seperation minima. This allows 2.5nm seperation rather than 3nm under certain conditions.
I know and understand that this can initially seem highly emotive, but let me try to assure you this wasn't done either lightly, or without appropriate data collection exercises. When the UK first moved this direction, many years ago, there was much raising of eyebrows (mine included!). The trial that resulted in the system we use today however showed NO increase of wake vortex incidents, minute increase of go-around incidents due to insufficient spacing, and therefore no safety reduction. Reduced seperation standards (below ICAO) therefore exist at certain airfields in the UK, under stringent rules, and constant monitoring.
I'm a pilot, the UK system works, it's safe, it's efficient. It's all of these because of the skill and professionalism of the NATS staff at the units concerned. Can it be made to work elsewhere? Of course it can, but stringent standards of who is validated to work these conditions has to exist, else the consistent high standards of controlling (and I DO mean high), erode the very small margins that exist.
Again, not sure of the intent behind your query, but all I can say, is as a humble pilot, it works EXTEMELY well and EXTREMELY safely here.
30W